Is the Windows XP Firewall enough?

[jmf]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it controls
incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.

I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
wasn't really necessary.

What's the current consensus, if any?

Thanks for any inputs,

John

 

[dl]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I have ZoneAlarm, free version, on an xp sys, it causes no problems

"JMF" <jfavaro@tin.it> wrote in message
news:%23lsCjNHtFHA.1028@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
> opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
> Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it
controls
> incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
>
> I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
> works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
> apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
> large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
> wasn't really necessary.
>
> What's the current consensus, if any?
>
> Thanks for any inputs,
>
> John
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I use a router and no software firewall.

--

Harry Ohrn MS-MVP [Shell/User]
www.webtree.ca/windowsxp


"JMF" <jfavaro@tin.it> wrote in message
news:%23lsCjNHtFHA.1028@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
> opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
> Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it
> controls
> incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
>
> I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
> works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
> apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
> large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
> wasn't really necessary.
>
> What's the current consensus, if any?
>
> Thanks for any inputs,
>
> John
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I use a hardware firewall in my router and a software firewall (Sygate
Personal Edition) - along with AVG Free and the Microsoft AntiSpyware Beta.
My system is on 24 hours a day - and I get hit with an attempted access at
least every other day.

Over the last 6 months of running this setup I've only had a few instances
of spyware and only 1 Trojan - and all were caught in time.

I've used Sygate since before Windows came out with a firewall. My main
objection to the Windows firewall is that you can't customize the permissions
as much, or a easily, as with Sygate.

"JMF" wrote:

> I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
> opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
> Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it controls
> incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
>
> I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
> works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
> apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
> large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
> wasn't really necessary.
>
> What's the current consensus, if any?
>
> Thanks for any inputs,
>
> John
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

Oops! Forgot to add...Don't run the 2 firewalls at the same time. Although
this may not affect your system's performance - there is the potential for a
conflict between the 2 programs.

Also, if you've got a firewall problem - how're you going to know which one
it's in?

"JMF" wrote:

> I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
> opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
> Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it controls
> incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
>
> I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
> works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
> apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
> large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
> wasn't really necessary.
>
> What's the current consensus, if any?
>
> Thanks for any inputs,
>
> John
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

This is a little different,

I use the XP firewall along with Norton System Works - Anti virus program.
Norton protects incoming and outgoing mail so the XP firewall does just
fine.

I also use Microsoft Anti Spy ware.
I haven't had any problems with this setup.

Updates are automatic on all of my programs.

Jerry

"JMF" <jfavaro@tin.it> wrote in message
news:%23lsCjNHtFHA.1028@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
> opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
> Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it
> controls
> incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
>
> I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
> works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
> apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
> large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
> wasn't really necessary.
>
> What's the current consensus, if any?
>
> Thanks for any inputs,
>
> John
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

To clarify this a little, do not run two software firewalls at the
same time. A hardware router firewall and a software firewall is OK
together.

Brian

"usasma" <usasma@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ED8C4515-D1E7-4C97-A48E-BCF0AF5B286B@microsoft.com...
> Oops! Forgot to add...Don't run the 2 firewalls at the same time.
Although
> this may not affect your system's performance - there is the
potential for a
> conflict between the 2 programs.
>
> Also, if you've got a firewall problem - how're you going to know
which one
> it's in?
>
> "JMF" wrote:
>
> > I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the
latest
> > opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another
firewall.
> > Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although
it controls
> > incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
> >
> > I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers,
which
> > works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer.
But
> > apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that
grow
> > large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall
*if* it
> > wasn't really necessary.
> >
> > What's the current consensus, if any?
> >
> > Thanks for any inputs,
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >

 

[dl]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I also have a netgear router, but I still experience the v.occassional
probe.
But by the same token I dont know what a popup is

"Harry Ohrn" <harry---@webtree.ca> wrote in message
news:eFjGgvHtFHA.3752@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> I use a router and no software firewall.
>
> --
>
> Harry Ohrn MS-MVP [Shell/User]
> www.webtree.ca/windowsxp
>
>
> "JMF" <jfavaro@tin.it> wrote in message
> news:%23lsCjNHtFHA.1028@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> >I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
> > opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
> > Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it
> > controls
> > incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
> >
> > I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
> > works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
> > apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
> > large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
> > wasn't really necessary.
> >
> > What's the current consensus, if any?
> >
> > Thanks for any inputs,
> >
> > John
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In article <uqW9heItFHA.460@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, jerrym526
@cablenet.com says...
> This is a little different,
>
> I use the XP firewall along with Norton System Works - Anti virus program.
> Norton protects incoming and outgoing mail so the XP firewall does just
> fine.
>
> I also use Microsoft Anti Spy ware.
> I haven't had any problems with this setup.
>
> Updates are automatic on all of my programs.

I would have to suggest, after decades of doing this type of work, that
no user controlled firewall on any PC is ENOUGH. If you want enough, get
a NAT Router and install it as the first device, then make sure you
follow safe browsing/downloading practices, and make sure you are not
running as an Administrator level account when playing around.

No personal firewall product, running on the same machine you use, where
you get to choose on the fly, is going to protect you against all forms
of intrusion - you are bound to make a mistake at some point.


--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

 

[jmf]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d8a27bce6d56477989f85@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <uqW9heItFHA.460@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, jerrym526
> @cablenet.com says...
> > This is a little different,
> >
> > I use the XP firewall along with Norton System Works - Anti virus
program.
> > Norton protects incoming and outgoing mail so the XP firewall does just
> > fine.
> >
> > I also use Microsoft Anti Spy ware.
> > I haven't had any problems with this setup.
> >
> > Updates are automatic on all of my programs.
>
> I would have to suggest, after decades of doing this type of work, that
> no user controlled firewall on any PC is ENOUGH. If you want enough, get
> a NAT Router and install it as the first device, then make sure you
> follow safe browsing/downloading practices, and make sure you are not
> running as an Administrator level account when playing around.

Interesting .. could you elaborate on that last point? What are the dangers
of running as an Administrator level account?

John

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

In article <#iWJUYJtFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, jfavaro@tin.it
says...
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d8a27bce6d56477989f85@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> > In article <uqW9heItFHA.460@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, jerrym526
> > @cablenet.com says...
> > > This is a little different,
> > >
> > > I use the XP firewall along with Norton System Works - Anti virus
> program.
> > > Norton protects incoming and outgoing mail so the XP firewall does just
> > > fine.
> > >
> > > I also use Microsoft Anti Spy ware.
> > > I haven't had any problems with this setup.
> > >
> > > Updates are automatic on all of my programs.
> >
> > I would have to suggest, after decades of doing this type of work, that
> > no user controlled firewall on any PC is ENOUGH. If you want enough, get
> > a NAT Router and install it as the first device, then make sure you
> > follow safe browsing/downloading practices, and make sure you are not
> > running as an Administrator level account when playing around.
>
> Interesting .. could you elaborate on that last point? What are the dangers
> of running as an Administrator level account?

You don't have to take my word for any of the above - just google and
search for best practices.

In the case of running as an Administrator, if something gets loose or
you run something you didn't mean to run, it has full administrator
access to the system - and if you are a domain administrator, well,
that's really bad.

If you browse the web using IE in default mode, you will run into many
things which want to do bad things to your system, running as a "User"
means they have less chance to do damage.

In the case of limited User accounts, they don't have permission to
install some applications, make system changes, etc...

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

JMF wrote:
> I know this is an old topic, but I thought I'd try to get the latest
> opinions on this. I'm trying to decide whether to get another firewall.
> Everybody says the problem with the XP firewall is that although it controls
> incoming connections, it doesn't control outgoing connections.
>
> I already have the free ZoneAlarm firewall on my Win2K computers, which
> works fine. And I could add it to my new XP Home Edition computer. But
> apparently some people complain that ZoneAlarm adds log files that grow
> large, etc. etc. so I figured I'd avoid adding another firewall *if* it
> wasn't really necessary.
>
> What's the current consensus, if any?
>
> Thanks for any inputs,
>
> John
>
>


The song remains the same...

WinXP's built-in firewall is adequate at stopping incoming attacks,
and hiding your ports from probes. What WinXP SP2's firewall does not
do, is protect you from any Trojans or spyware that you (or someone
else using your computer) might download and install inadvertently.
It doesn't monitor out-going traffic at all, other than to check for
IP-spoofing, much less block (or at even ask you about) the bad or the
questionable out-going signals. It assumes that any application you
have on your hard drive is there because you want it there, and
therefore has your "permission" to access the Internet. Further,
because the Windows Firewall is a "stateful" firewall, it will also
assume that any incoming traffic that's a direct response to a
Trojan's or spyware's out-going signal is also authorized.

ZoneAlarm, Kerio, or Sygate are all much better than WinXP's
built-in firewall, and are much more easily configured, and there are
free versions of each readily available. Even the commercially
available Symantec's Norton Personal Firewall is superior by far,
although it does take a heavier toll of system performance then do
ZoneAlarm or Sygate.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
both at once. - RAH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

The windows xp firewall does not work well at all i use norton
"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d8a27bce6d56477989f85@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <uqW9heItFHA.460@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, jerrym526
> @cablenet.com says...
>> This is a little different,
>>
>> I use the XP firewall along with Norton System Works - Anti virus
>> program.
>> Norton protects incoming and outgoing mail so the XP firewall does just
>> fine.
>>
>> I also use Microsoft Anti Spy ware.
>> I haven't had any problems with this setup.
>>
>> Updates are automatic on all of my programs.
>
> I would have to suggest, after decades of doing this type of work, that
> no user controlled firewall on any PC is ENOUGH. If you want enough, get
> a NAT Router and install it as the first device, then make sure you
> follow safe browsing/downloading practices, and make sure you are not
> running as an Administrator level account when playing around.
>
> No personal firewall product, running on the same machine you use, where
> you get to choose on the fly, is going to protect you against all forms
> of intrusion - you are bound to make a mistake at some point.
>
>
> --
>
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me